MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309226865 · doi:10.1109/nof55974.2022.9942599

Availability and Failure Rate of VNF Instances: Impacting Parameters and Calculation Methods

2022· article· en· W4309226865 on OpenAlexaff
Siamak Azadiabad, Ferhat Khendek, Maria Toeroe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsEricsson (Canada)Concordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual networkDistributed computingWorkloadFailure rateVirtualizationFunction (biology)Computer networkHigh availabilityComponent (thermodynamics)Reliability engineeringCloud computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network Function Virtualization (NFV) defines a dynamic environment to deploy Virtual Network Functions (VNF) as constituents of Network Services (NS) that provide specific network functionalities. A VNF is composed of at least one VNF Component (VNFC) and zero, or more Internal Virtual Links (IntVL). The availability of an NS depends on the availability of the composing VNF functionalities. In turn these depend on the underlying resources, their placement constraints, policies, and their number, which change over time as required by the varying workload. Accordingly, the availability and failure rate of a VNF instance may vary over time. That is, it may be different for the different VNF scaling levels. In this paper, we investigate the parameters affecting the availability and the failure rate of a VNF instance, and we propose methods to calculate for such dynamic cases the guaranteed minimum availability and the guaranteed maximum failure rate for a VNF instance considering a given infrastructure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207